DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif

66 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

7
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
5
Events
8
Relationships
8
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Report excerpt
File Size: 66 KB
Summary

This document details efforts by Acosta to revise the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with language concerning monetary damages for victims of Jeffrey Epstein, which was ultimately rejected by the defense. It highlights disagreements and frustrations between prosecutors and defense counsel regarding the interpretation and implementation of the Section 2255 provision, particularly concerning victim notification and Epstein's alleged delays in his guilty plea.

People (7)

Name Role Context
Acosta Prosecutor / Attorney
Undertook to respond to defense counsel's concerns, sent language to Mandelker, sent letter to Sanchez, had phone con...
Sigal Mandelker Deputy Assistant Attorney General
Received proposed language from Acosta, forwarded to her counterpart in Civil Division.
Sloman Individual involved in conversations
Had phone conversation with Acosta, Starr, and Lefkowitz; had another conversation with Acosta and Lefkowitz.
Starr Individual involved in conversations
Had phone conversation with Acosta, Sloman, and Lefkowitz; had another conversation with Acosta and Sloman.
Lefkowitz Defense Counsel
Had phone conversation with Acosta, Sloman, and Starr; responded by letter to Acosta, asserted Epstein was intentiona...
Sanchez Recipient of letter
Received a letter from Acosta.
Mr. Epstein Defendant
Subject of the legal proceedings, his attorneys were to receive a list of victims, desired to take an '11th hour appe...

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
Civil Division
Mandelker's counterpart's department.
United States
Government entity responsible for providing list of victims' names.
USAO
United States Attorney's Office, concerned about Epstein's delays.
OPR
Office of Professional Responsibility, Acosta told them about his frustration.
Department
Refers to the Department of Justice, where Epstein sought an '11th hour appeal'.

Timeline (5 events)

2007-12-19
Acosta sent a letter to Sanchez proposing revised language for the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) relating to § 2255, following a phone conversation with Starr and Lefkowitz.
late 2007
Lefkowitz responded to Acosta's NPA proposal, raising 'troubling questions' and noting the incongruity of fitting a federal civil remedies statute into a criminal plea agreement.
late 2007
Lefkowitz sent a follow-up letter to Acosta, expressing USAO's concern about Epstein intentionally delaying his guilty plea.
late 2007
Acosta told OPR he was 'increasingly frustrated' by Epstein's desire for an '11th hour appeal'.
Acosta Epstein OPR
late 2007
The defense team rejected Acosta's December 19, 2007, NPA modification letter.

Relationships (8)

Acosta communicated (shared language) Sigal Mandelker
He sent to Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sigal Mandelker language that he proposed...
Sigal Mandelker communicated (forwarded language) Civil Division counterpart
Mandelker forwarded the language to her counterpart in the Civil Division...
Acosta collaborated (phone conversation) Sloman
after Acosta and Sloman had a phone conversation...
Acosta communicated (phone conversation) Starr
Acosta and Sloman had a phone conversation with Starr and Lefkowitz...
Acosta communicated (phone conversation, letters) Lefkowitz
Acosta and Sloman had a phone conversation with Starr and Lefkowitz... Lefkowitz responded by letter... Lefkowitz sent a second letter to Acosta...
Acosta communicated (sent letter) Sanchez
Acosta sent to Sanchez a letter...
Acosta prosecutor/defendant Mr. Epstein
if Mr. Epstein [had] been tried federally... Mr. Epstein's attorneys... Mr. Epstein been convicted... Epstein was intentionally delaying... Epstein's desire to take an '11th hour appeal'...
Starr collaborated (conversation) Lefkowitz
After Starr and Lefkowitz had another conversation with Acosta and Sloman...

Key Quotes (8)

""Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein [had] been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less.""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #1
""several troubling questions""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #2
""the problem arises from the incongruity that exists when attempting to fit a federal civil remedies statute into a criminal plea agreement.""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #3
""any impediment to the resolution at issue is a direct cause of the disagreements between the parties,""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #4
""at all times made and will continue to make sincere efforts to resolve and finalize issues as expeditiously as possible.""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #5
""increasingly frustrated""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #6
""11th hour appeal""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #7
""inherently flawed and becoming truly unmanageable.""
Source
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
Quote #8

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document